Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Maxillofacial Re-Reconstruction of Bony Free Flaps Affected by Osteoradionecrosis: 10-Year Single-Institution Experience.

Head & neck·2026
Same author

ASO Visual Abstract: Key Updates on the Version 9 AJCC/UICC Staging System for Salivary Gland Carcinoma.

Annals of surgical oncology·2026
Same author

Multicenter Comparison of Modern Plating Options in Fibula, Scapula, and Osteocutaneous Radial Forearm Free Flaps.

Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery·2026
Same author

Evaluation of a conversation aid for patients with thyroid nodules considering a biopsy: pilot multicenter randomized control trial.

Endocrine·2026
Same author

Key Updates on the Version 9 AJCC/UICC Staging System for Salivary Gland Carcinoma.

Annals of surgical oncology·2026
Same author

Proposed Version Nine of the AJCC and UICC TNM Classification for Salivary Gland Carcinoma.

JAMA otolaryngology-- head & neck surgery·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 25, 2025

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
10:42

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible

Published on: January 28, 2020

6.6K

Improving Quality and Value in Head and Neck Reconstruction.

Kiran Kakarala1, Matthew Mifsud2, Peter Dziegielewski3

  • 1Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, University of Kansas Medical Center, 3901 Rainbow Boulevard, Kansas City, KS 66160, USA.

Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America
|June 28, 2023
PubMed
Summary

Head and neck reconstruction has advanced significantly, but defining value and quality remains challenging. This review examines past, present, and future quality improvement strategies in this surgical field.

Keywords:
CostERASFree flapHead and neck reconstructionImprovementMicrovascularQualityValue

More Related Videos

Porcine As a Training Module for Head and Neck Microvascular Reconstruction
07:43

Porcine As a Training Module for Head and Neck Microvascular Reconstruction

Published on: September 29, 2018

7.8K
Real-Time Dynamic Navigation System for the Precise Quad-Zygomatic Implant Placement in a Patient with a Severely Atrophic Maxilla
05:54

Real-Time Dynamic Navigation System for the Precise Quad-Zygomatic Implant Placement in a Patient with a Severely Atrophic Maxilla

Published on: October 18, 2021

1.8K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 25, 2025

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible
10:42

A Postoperative Evaluation Guideline for Computer-Assisted Reconstruction of the Mandible

Published on: January 28, 2020

6.6K
Porcine As a Training Module for Head and Neck Microvascular Reconstruction
07:43

Porcine As a Training Module for Head and Neck Microvascular Reconstruction

Published on: September 29, 2018

7.8K
Real-Time Dynamic Navigation System for the Precise Quad-Zygomatic Implant Placement in a Patient with a Severely Atrophic Maxilla
05:54

Real-Time Dynamic Navigation System for the Precise Quad-Zygomatic Implant Placement in a Patient with a Severely Atrophic Maxilla

Published on: October 18, 2021

1.8K

Area of Science:

  • Surgical Innovation
  • Health Systems Research
  • Patient Outcomes

Background:

  • Head and neck reconstruction has seen substantial advancements in surgical techniques, technology, and perioperative care over four decades.
  • Rising healthcare costs have increased focus on value and quality from health systems, patients, and payers.
  • A lack of consensus exists regarding the definition of value and quality in head and neck reconstruction.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review the evolution of quality improvement efforts in head and neck reconstruction.
  • To explore current challenges and future directions in defining and measuring value and quality in this specialty.
  • To provide a framework for understanding quality in head and neck reconstruction.

Main Methods:

  • Literature review of surgical advancements and quality improvement initiatives.
  • Analysis of trends in healthcare costs and their impact on reconstructive surgery.
  • Synthesis of existing literature to identify consensus and gaps in defining value and quality.

Main Results:

  • Significant technological and surgical progress has been made.
  • Healthcare economics are increasingly influencing patient care decisions.
  • Defining and measuring quality and value in head and neck reconstruction lacks a unified approach.

Conclusions:

  • Quality improvement in head and neck reconstruction requires a multidimensional approach.
  • Future efforts must establish clear metrics for value and quality.
  • Interdisciplinary collaboration is essential for advancing patient care and system efficiency.